Across several episodes, Candace Owens made pointed claims about specific
exhibits and events in the Charlie Kirk / Tyler Robinson case — the DNA on the gun, the
seized backpack and the FBI lab notes, the Exhibit 12.4 stairwell video, Officer Bagley's bodycam and
the rooftop, the witnesses. This page takes those checkable claims and examines each in detail
against the primary court record in this archive — where the record actually
corroborates or contradicts what she said. It is a record-keeping exercise, not a
verdict on her.
Last checked 2026-07-19.
How to read this — the record is incomplete. The case is at the
preliminary-hearing / bindover stage; the full record does not exist yet. Below are the
claims the record does speak to. Claims the record has not yet reached are kept
in a separate list at the bottom — and "not yet addressed" means the record is silent,
which is not a finding that the claim is false. Absence of evidence is not evidence of
absence. Only the court record establishes facts; a commentator's words establish only what was
said. Plain verdicts, no loaded labels.
27
Claims about the record, examined
22
Corroborated
5
Contradicted
29
Not yet reached by the record
What the record found — at a glance
A summary of her exhibit- and event-specific claims below. Tap any to jump to the detailed record analysis.
Ask about any exhibit, witness, or event Candace raised and get a detailed, record-anchored
answer — what the testimony or exhibit actually shows and how it corroborates or contradicts
what she said. It leads with the claims the record speaks to, and says plainly when the record is
still silent (which is not the same as false).
Try:
Claims the record speaks to
Her claims about specific exhibits and events, examined against the record — contradicted first, then corroborated. Each is tagged with the episode it came from.
evidenceEp 358Contradicted by the record
“Tyler Robinson's fingerprints and DNA were found on the gun used to kill Charlie Kirk.”
What the record shows: This claim has two distinct components: (1) DNA on the gun, and (2) fingerprints on the gun. The court record addresses both, and the picture is more complicated than the claim suggests.
What the Record Shows on DNA
The DNA component is substantially supported by the record, but with critical qualifications the claim omits.
The charging document (Information, filed 2025-09-16) states: "DNA consistent with Robinson was found on the rifle's trigger". The preliminary hearing expanded this considerably.
“Nine abandoned items were found on the route between Loy Center and the library, but only three were recalled by the witness.”
What the record shows: The Witness and the Testimony
The relevant testimony comes from a witness examined during the preliminary hearing whose identity in these passages is not named in the specific exchange Owens is describing. What the primary record does not contain, in any of the passages provided, is a witness stating — or being confronted with — a figure of "nine" abandoned items. That number is not in the transcript passages here.
What *is* in the record, in Owens's own words, is her paraphrase of the cross-examination exchange:
> *"of which she's only recalling in her fuzzy memory three of them.
“The FBI contacted the rooftop video witness only once, a few days after the shooting.”
What the record shows: Attribution note first: None of the OWN WORDS passages contain Candace Owens making this specific claim in her own voice. The only passage that asserts she made it is the Mediaite news report, which states: "she claimed... Lance 'Luna' Twiggs 'was never questioned by the police.'" That is a related but distinct claim (about Twiggs, not about a rooftop video witness), and it comes from a third-party outlet, not from Owens's own recorded words. Under strict attribution discipline, the precise formulation — "the FBI contacted the rooftop video witness only once, a few days after the shooting" — cannot be confirmed as Owens's own words from the passages provided here.
That said, the reader has presented this as the claim to be checked against the record.
“A gun and screwdriver with Robinson's DNA were discovered and announced by Cash Patel a couple of days after Robinson's arrest.”
What the record shows: What Owens Actually Said
In her own words, Owens states: *"by that time, of course, they had also announced that they found the gun and uh a screwdriver which had his DNA on it. That was announced by Cash Patel a couple of days later, but they had kind of already leaked that they were looking — they had discovered this a screwdriver. I think it was actually the next day on September 11th. Um was the first time we heard about this."*
The claim therefore has three separable components: (1) a gun was found; (2) a screwdriver was found; (3) Robinson's DNA on both was announced by Cash Patel a couple of days after Robinson's arrest. Each must be assessed against the primary record independently.
Component 1 & 2: Gun and Screwdriver Found — CORROBORATED
The primary record firmly establishes both items. The charging document states that "police found the suspected murder weapon, a bolt-action .30-06 rifle nearby" after the September 10, 2025 shooting.
“The screwdriver discovery was first reported on September 11th.”
What the record shows: In her own words, Candace Owens stated in Episode 360 (published July 17, 2026): "I think it was actually the next day on September 11th. Um was the first time we heard about this" — referring to when the screwdriver discovery was first publicly reported. The claim under analysis is that September 11th was the date of first public reporting on the screwdriver.
What the Court Record Actually Shows
The primary record directly contradicts the premise that the screwdriver was first discovered or reported on September 11th. Officer Baggley testified at the preliminary hearing (Day 1, July 6, 2026) that he personally observed the screwdriver on September 10th, 2025 — the same day as the shooting itself. The court admitted States Exhibit 3.1, described by the judge on the record as "a fair and accurate representation as this item on that date of September 10th 2025".
“Tyler Robinson's parents turned him in to police and made official police statements against their son.”
What the record shows: The claim Candace Owens attributes to the "Fed narrative" — that Tyler Robinson's parents turned him in to police and made official police statements against their son — is directly and substantially corroborated by the primary record. The charging document (Information, filed 2025-09-16) and the court proceeding transcript from the same date both contain detailed accounts of exactly this sequence of events.
The Specific Record Evidence
Robinson's mother's statement to police. The Information states that Robinson's mother "stated the following to police": on September 11, 2025, she saw the news photo of the suspected shooter and "thought the shooter looked like her son." She called Robinson, questioned him about his whereabouts, expressed concern to her husband, and provided police with background on Robinson's political evolution over the prior year — his leftward shift, his relationship with a transgender roommate, his prior statement that Charlie Kirk "spreads hate," and the family's political tensions.
“Tyler Robinson's mother recognized him on the news and his father turned him in.”
What the record shows: The Mother's Recognition
The Information (charging document) filed September 16, 2025 states directly: "On September 11, 2025, the day after the shooting, Robinson's mother saw the photo of the shooter in the news and thought the shooter looked like her son". She then called Robinson and asked where he was. She subsequently "expressed concern to her husband that the suspected shooter looked like Robinson". The live court proceeding transcript from the same date corroborates this verbatim.
This is a clean corroboration of the "mother recognized him on the news" element.
“Lance Twigs was granted immunity by federal authorities and was not allowed to be cross-examined at the preliminary hearing stage.”
What the record shows: What Owens Actually Said
In her own words on her July 14, 2026 podcast, Candace Owens stated that Lance Twigs "was immediately granted immunity by the feds and was not allowed to even be cross-examined at this stage for this hearing, despite arguments made that his testament would amount to hearsay". That is the precise claim under analysis. Both components — immunity granted by federal authorities, and no cross-examination at the preliminary hearing stage — are addressed directly in the primary record.
What the Court Record Shows
On immunity: The primary record corroborates this component without ambiguity. In the recorded interview played as States Exhibit 16 during Day 4 of the preliminary hearing (July 9, 2026), the interviewing officer stated on the record, before taking Twigs's sworn statement: *"I just want to make sure that our recording here is clear that you've also been given a federal agreement and a state agreement granting you immunity from prosecution for materials that you discuss now.
“Multiple men dressed similarly to Tyler Robinson were present on campus on the day in question, which Owens characterizes as 'decoys' or 'maroon boys.'”
What the record shows: What Owens Actually Said
The only source that can establish what Owens said is her own recorded words. In her July 14, 2026 episode, she stated directly: *"We suggested that the feds intentionally flooded the zone with multiple decoys, different young men, all brunette, all wearing similar outfits. We termed these our maroon boys, right? Decoys. Photos of three of them in a row right here. I said, 'Why were so many men dressed like Tyler Robinson on this day? We showed you footage of many more of these men wandering, all of who fit the description of what we're about to see.'"*
She also stated that her *"biggest claim"* was that Robinson *"did not step foot onto campus on that day"* — and that she expected the hearing to either confirm or refute that claim with *"one clear photo of Tyler Robinson on campus."*
The "decoys" framing is therefore confirmed as her own characterization, not a paraphrase by a critic.
“Tyler Robinson told his family he was around campus but did not physically step foot on campus on the day in question.”
What the record shows: What Owens Actually Claimed
In her own words from her July 14, 2026 podcast, Owens stated:
> "Our biggest claim…that we probably made on the show was that Tyler Robinson did not step foot onto campus on that day. At least that is what he told his family, that he was around campus, but not physically on campus himself."
This is the claim to evaluate. It has two components: (1) Robinson told his family he was around campus but not physically on it; and (2) Owens presented this as the basis for her broader argument. The record speaks directly to component (1).
What the Court Record Shows
The charging document (Information, filed September 16, 2025) is the primary source.
“Exhibit 12.4 presented in court was a compilation video of blurry males going up and down stairs at the Loy Center.”
What the record shows: The Exhibit in the Record
The primary record addresses Exhibit 12.4 directly during Day 2 of the preliminary hearing (July 7, 2026).
“A witness (Miss Noble) told police she saw a bald man accompanied by three other people in a gray Dodge Challenger at 12:47 a.m. near campus.”
What the record shows: What Owens Actually Said
In her own words from her July 14, 2026 podcast, Owens made two distinct moves. First, she characterized the claim herself: "a witness confirmed that they saw someone else driving a gray Challenger, particularly a bald guy driving the Challenger late at 12:47 a.m." and "the woman who captured that footage testified to police that she saw a bald man accompanied by three other people in the car." Second — and critically — she then played what she described as actual court testimony to support it.
What the Court Record Shows
The relevant testimony comes from Agent Hull's examination during Day 1 of the preliminary hearing. The exchange, as captured in Owens's own-words passage (which quotes it verbatim), runs as follows:
> "And do you remember that the nobles told you that the driver of the vehicle was bald?" → "I do remember that being in the report. Yes."
> "And did they also tell you there were —" → "Yes. I believe they they thought that was the case."
This is the testimony Owens plays.
“Sergeant Jennifer Filomina testified that officers found unattended items (backpack, jacket, gloves) at bus stops near Fulton Library during the scene canvass.”
What the record shows: The claim as stated — that Sergeant Jennifer Filomina testified that officers found unattended items (backpack, jacket, gloves) at bus stops near Fulton Library during the scene canvass — is directly and substantially supported by the primary court record.
The Witness and Her Testimony
Passages and (Primary Record, Preliminary Hearing Day 4, July 9, 2026) contain the relevant testimony. The witness is identified in Candace Owens's own words as "Sergeant Jennifer Filomina" of the UVU Department of Public Safety.
“The seized items from the bus stops were sent to the FBI lab for processing.”
What the record shows: The claim that seized items from the bus stops were sent to the FBI lab for processing is directly and explicitly confirmed by testimony in the primary record from Day 4 of the preliminary hearing (July 9, 2026).
The Testimony
In passage, during examination of a witness at the Day 4 preliminary hearing, the following exchange appears in the transcript:
> "Uh, those whatever was seized was sent to the FBI lab for processing." >> "Yes."
The witness — whose name is not fully captured in the ASR excerpt of passage, though the proceeding context identifies this as testimony from an investigative agent — confirmed this directly under oath. The items described immediately before this exchange were a backpack, a jacket, and gloves, recovered from bus stops near the Fulton Library area at or near Utah Valley University.
“A decision was made to request DNA and other analysis be performed on the seized items.”
What the record shows: The claim — that "a decision was made to request DNA and other analysis be performed on the seized items" — is directly supported by the primary record through testimony and forensic evidence presented at the preliminary hearing.
The Witness and the Evidence
The primary record establishes this through the testimony of FBI forensic examiner Amanda Bakker, referenced in the court transcript from Day 2 of the preliminary hearing (July 7, 2026). The DNA analysis she conducted was presented through two specific items: item 7 (a towel) and item 8 (a screwdriver recovered from the rooftop of the LC building at Utah Valley University).
The transcript records direct examination establishing that both items were subjected to DNA analysis. Bakker testified that item 8, the screwdriver, showed "some degradation" in the DNA data — describing a "ski slope type effect" in the peaks — while item 7, the towel, showed "a slight amount of degradation but not as much as item 8".
“Communication was sent to the lab indicating that the seized items were not connected to the case and no further testing was needed.”
What the record shows: The claim — that communication was sent to the lab indicating the seized items were not connected to the case and no further testing was needed — is directly addressed in the preliminary hearing testimony and is substantively corroborated, with one precise nuance: the witness did not personally remember sending that communication, but she did not deny it occurred and affirmatively agreed with the underlying conclusion.
The Testimony
The relevant exchange appears in the Day 4 preliminary hearing transcript (July 9, 2026), during examination of a law enforcement witness.
“The prosecution asked the FBI not to test the nine abandoned items.”
What the record shows: In her own words, Candace Owens states: "the FBI moved not to test those abandoned items" — referring to a backpack, gloves, and jacket found at a bus stop near the library on the route the alleged shooter traveled. She frames this as a deliberate decision, asking rhetorically what information could have caused investigators to conclude testing was unnecessary.
The specific claim under analysis is narrower: that the prosecution asked the FBI not to test the nine abandoned items. Owens's own words in passage attribute the decision to the FBI itself ("the FBI moved not to test"), while also noting the items were found on the suspect's alleged route. The question is what the court record shows about *who* made that decision and *what* the record says about it.
What the Record Shows
The primary record passages provided here do not contain a direct, verbatim exchange in which a prosecutor explicitly instructs the FBI not to test specific abandoned items.
“Tyler Robinson was found in 33 hours after the shooting.”
What the record shows: The claim that Tyler Robinson was found (or surrendered) approximately 33 hours after the shooting is directly supported by two independent primary-record sources: the formal charging document and a court proceeding transcript.
The Information (charging document), filed September 16, 2025, states plainly: "Over the next approximately 33 hours, police conducted a manhunt for the shooter until the evening of September 11, 2025, when Tyler James Robinson surrendered to police at the Washington County Sheriff's Office." The underlying event — Kirk's shooting — is placed at "approximately 12:23 p.m." on September 10, 2025.
“Officer Bagley arrived at the Lozi Center rooftop at 12:44 p.m., approximately 21 minutes after the shooting at 12:23 p.m.”
What the record shows: The Shooting Time: 12:23 p.m.
The charging document (Information, filed 2025-09-16) states plainly: "On September 10, 2025, at approximately 12:23 p.m., Charlie Kirk was shot and killed while speaking to a large crowd on the campus of Utah Valley University (UVU) in Orem, Utah.". This is repeated verbatim in the county attorney's press conference record. The 12:23 p.m. time is not contested anywhere in the provided record.
Officer Bagley's Arrival Time: 12:44 p.m.
Officer Bagley testified directly on this point during the preliminary hearing (Day 1, July 6, 2026). Asked by the prosecutor "Do you know about what time you got there?" — referring to the Lozi Center rooftop — Bagley answered: "Um, I pro I got up there at 12:44.".
“Officer Bagley's body camera footage is 27 minutes and 35 seconds long, starting at the pole of flags and ending while still on the roof before crime tape was put up.”
What the record shows: The primary record corroborates all three components of this claim, because the claim is not Owens's independent assertion — it is her direct quotation of testimony given by Officer Bagley himself under examination at the preliminary hearing.
The Testimony Owens Is Quoting
Passages and are verbatim transcripts of Owens's own podcast, and they contain what is clearly a quoted exchange from the preliminary hearing. The questioner asks:
> "So, that 27 minute and 35 second body cam that starts when you're at the pole of flags and ends while you're still on the roof, but haven't put the crime tape up yet. That's the only body cam you have that day?"
Officer Bagley responds: "Yes."
This is not Owens characterizing the footage from her own viewing.
“Officer Bagley testified that an unidentified individual in civilian clothing with a gun and badge accompanied him onto the Lozi Center rooftop.”
What the record shows: The Specific Testimony
The Day 1 transcript places Bagley on the stand being questioned about the rooftop of the LC (Lozi Center) building, where he located the screwdriver (States Exhibit 3.1) approximately "10 or 15 feet in" from the stairway entrance after hopping over a rail. This establishes the rooftop scene and Bagley as the witness.
Owens's own words go further in characterizing what Bagley said about the unidentified individual.
“Officer Bagley did not review video footage to determine if anyone else had been on the roof between when the person jumped off and when he arrived.”
What the record shows: The claim — that Officer Bagley did not review video footage to determine whether anyone else had been on the roof between the moment the person jumped off and when Bagley arrived — is directly addressed in the preliminary hearing transcript and is corroborated by Bagley's own testimony under cross-examination.
The Testimony (Primary Record)
The key exchange appears in the July 11, 2026 proceeding and is reproduced in Candace Owens's own July 17, 2026 podcast transcript, which quotes it verbatim. The two sources are consistent with each other on the substance.
Under cross-examination, Bagley was asked a precise, sequenced question: from the time the individual he spotted on video jumped off the roof — the individual he believed had been in a prone/sniper position — up until the moment Bagley himself got onto that roof, did he ever check the video to see whether anyone else had been on the roof or disturbed the scene during that gap?
Bagley's initial answer was ambiguous.
“An officer was present on the rooftop with Tyler Robinson but did not review footage from 12:23 to 12:44 (the 20 minutes before arriving on the rooftop).”
What the record shows: The Officer and the Rooftop
Officer Baggley is the named witness in the primary record whose testimony is most directly relevant here. Day 1 of the preliminary hearing establishes that Baggley testified about his presence on the Losi building rooftop on September 10, 2025, and specifically described the location of a screwdriver found there — "about 10 or 15 feet in" from the stairway entrance. His testimony places him physically on that rooftop as part of the law enforcement response.
The timestamps are anchored in the charging document, which states that the relevant events began "at approximately 12:23" on September 10, 2025.
“A backpack, jacket, and gloves were seized from a bus stop near the Fulton Library along the shooter's suspected route.”
What the record shows: The claim is precisely corroborated by sworn testimony in the preliminary hearing. During Day 4 (July 9, 2026), defense counsel cross-examined the lead investigative agent — identified in the ASR transcript as "Agent Hull" — about a September 22nd report the agent authored documenting an overview of the crime scenes. The agent confirmed that the Fulton Library was designated a potential crime scene because officers canvassing the area, while attempting to trace the shooter's route, found "unattended items there at the bus stops that were away from the courtyard area" and "thought it was suspicious." When asked what was seized, the agent testified: "Yes, you had a backpack, um, a jacket, as well as some gloves. And there may have been some other things.
“These seized items were sent to the FBI lab for DNA and other analysis.”
What the record shows: The claim — that seized items were sent to the FBI lab for DNA and other analysis — is directly and specifically corroborated by the court record at multiple points across the preliminary hearing testimony.
The Key Testimony
The clearest corroboration comes from Day 4 of the preliminary hearing (July 9, 2026), in examination of a witness (whose name is not clearly captured in the ASR transcript). The questioning and answers are explicit:
> "Those — whatever was seized — was sent to the FBI lab for processing." "Yes."
> "Was a decision at some time made and you were requesting that both DNA and other type of analysis get done?" "Yes."
The items in question were identified in the same exchange as a backpack, a jacket, and gloves — unattended items found near a bus stop outside the Fulton Library, away from the courtyard area, which officers deemed suspicious while canvassing the scene and attempting to trace the shooter's route.
This testimony directly establishes two elements of Owens's claim: (1) the seized items were sent to th
“Sergeant Jennifer Filomena from the Utah Bureau of Investigations does not recall communicating to the lab that the items were no longer probative.”
What the record shows: The claim attributed to Candace Owens — that Sergeant Jennifer Filomena from the Utah Bureau of Investigations does not recall communicating to the lab that the items were no longer probative — is directly and specifically corroborated by the court transcript from the preliminary hearing.
The Witness and Her Testimony
Sergeant Jennifer Filomena (rendered in the ASR captions as "Famina" or "Felomina" — treat the spelling as approximate) testified at the preliminary hearing. She is identified in the record as a sergeant within the State Bureau of Investigation, assigned to oversee crime scenes and physical evidence on September 10, 2025, and serving as team lead over the Evidence Response Team.
The relevant exchange appears in the OWN WORDS passage from Candace Owens's July 17, 2026 episode, which plays back what is presented as verbatim courtroom testimony.
“FBI lab personnel added notes stating the backpack belonged to someone on Charlie's detail, but Amanda Baker does not recall being told this information.”
What the record shows: The Testimony: Amanda Baker on the Backpack
In Owens's own words, she plays and paraphrases Baker's cross-examination testimony.
Claims the record hasn't reached yet (29) — the record is silent, which is not the same as false
On-air claims — many about third parties, motives, or off-record events — that the preliminary-hearing record does not yet address. Kept for completeness; silence here is not disproof and may change as the case proceeds.
third-partyEp 360Not addressed by the record
“Nate Walker served as Charlie Kirk's executive assistant responsible for selecting his clothing.”
evidenceEp 360Not addressed by the record
“A witness recorded video of the shooter on the Loy Center roof and circulated it, which was widely spread that day.”
third-partyEp 360Not addressed by the record
“The witness who recorded the rooftop video reported to the UVU command center that George Zen was not the shooter.”
procedureEp 360Not addressed by the record
“The prosecution has never called the rooftop video witness to testify.”
third-partyEp 358Not addressed by the record
“Ben Shapiro's security received phone updates from someone in Charlie Kirk's car while Kirk was dying en route to the hospital, approximately a 7-minute ride.”
third-partyEp 358Not addressed by the record
“Bill Aman pledged $1 million to Tyler Robinson's father Matt Robinson for turning in his son.”
procedureEp 358Not addressed by the record
“Erica Kirk stated in an interview with Barry Weiss (November or December) that she had seen evidence and was convinced it was Tyler Robinson.”
third-partyEp 358Not addressed by the record
“Mike Mitchell, a former undercover detective and Tyler Robinson's former Boy Scout leader, was involved in bringing Tyler Robinson in to police.”
evidenceEp 358Not addressed by the record
“The Dodge Challenger shown in surveillance footage has dual exhaust pipes, while Tyler Robinson's Dodge Challenger (towed from his driveway) has a single exhaust pipe.”
timelineEp 358Not addressed by the record
“Tyler Robinson paid for a steak dinner in Panguitch at 9:47 p.m. using his debit card, placing him three hours away from campus at that time.”
evidenceEp 359Not addressed by the record
“An unidentified object was found in the backseat of Charlie's SUV that he was transported to the hospital in.”
timelineEp 359Not addressed by the record
“Blake Neff cannot remember what he was doing on the morning of September 10th.”
timelineEp 359Not addressed by the record
“Blake Neff was on board a private jet with Charlie to Salt Lake City on the morning of September 10th.”
timelineEp 359Not addressed by the record
“Charlie Kirk had an event before another event on September 10th and did a last interview with someone named Andrew Smith.”
third-partyEp 359Not addressed by the record
“Blake Neff was hired to work with Charlie in 2022 after leaving Fox News due to racist comments.”
third-partyEp 359Not addressed by the record
“Blake Neff previously worked for Stu Peters before working with Charlie Kirk.”
otherEp 359Not addressed by the record
“A military-affiliated student center called MASH is located on the third floor of the Loaiza Student Center.”
evidenceEp 359Not addressed by the record
“Mikey McCoy rented two SUVs in Salt Lake City to meet the arriving group.”
evidenceEp 359Not addressed by the record
“One SUV carried Charlie Kirk, Mikey McCoy, Frank Turek, and John McGovern from Turning Point USA.”
evidenceEp 359Not addressed by the record
“Blake Neff was in the second SUV and did not attend the Savory Fund restaurant event.”
timelineEp 359Not addressed by the record
“Danny Philip graduated from Ohio State University in May 2025.”
timelineEp 359Not addressed by the record
“Danny Philip was hired by Turning Point USA immediately after graduating college in May 2025.”
evidenceEp 359Not addressed by the record
“Mikey McCoy called Danny Philip before Charlie Kirk was shot at 12:02 and again for 10 minutes after the shooting.”
third-partyEp 359Not addressed by the record
“Thomas Patrick, Danny Philip's grandfather, was executive vice chairman and CEO of Merrill Lynch and worked there for 25 years.”
evidenceEp 360Not addressed by the record
“Charlie Kirk was wearing a customized Carhartt shirt on September 10th.”
third-partyEp 360Not addressed by the record
“Frank Churik worked as a consultant for Bank of America for approximately 15 years until 2011.”
third-partyEp 360Not addressed by the record
“A witness reported seeing someone in all black tactical gear on a roof near the library and made a report to police.”
evidenceEp 361Not addressed by the record
“The FBI lab determined the backpack belonged to someone on Charlie Kirk's security detail and ceased testing as a result.”
evidenceEp 361Not addressed by the record
“The hospital was not informed ahead of time that Charlie Kirk was en route.”
Claims were extracted from the verbatim episode captions and each examined against the primary-record
archive (court proceedings + charging documents). Verdicts reflect the record as of the
preliminary-hearing stage and will be revisited as the case proceeds. This page keeps a record;
it does not offer an opinion.
We value your privacy. We use cookies to understand how visitors use this site so we can improve it. No personal data is sold or shared with third parties. By clicking "Accept," you consent to analytics cookies. You can decline and still use the site fully.
See our About page for details. EU/EEA visitors: per GDPR Art. 6(1)(a), consent is required. US visitors: per CCPA, you may opt out at any time.